GUDDENNAGARI RAMAKRISHNA,KURNOOL V. ITO., WARD-1, KURNOOL

ITA 1191/HYD/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Guddennagari Ramakrishna, the appellant, who did not file his income tax return for the assessment year 2017-2018. The Income Tax Department noted substantial cash deposits in his account and reopened his case under section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, issuing notices under section 148. The Assessing Officer, after receiving no response from the assessee, assessed his income based on the deposits and other interest income under section 69A. The assessee appealed to the CIT(A), which also sustained the additions due to non-response. The assessee then appealed to the Tribunal, which dismissed the appeal due to a significant delay in filing and lack of a reasonable cause for such delay.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 23068 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 10-03-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB-B
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Other Referred Cases: M/s. Kolte Patil Developer Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT, Subodh Prakash vs. JCIT
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SACHIN KUMAR
• Keywords: Reasonable cause; Competent authority; Reason to believe

Judgement Text

" 1 ITA.No.1191/Hyd./2024 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD “B” BENCH : HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI MANJUNATHA G, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA.No.1191/Hyd/2024 Assessment Year 2017-2018 Guddennagari Ramakrishna, KURNOOL. PIN – 518464 PAN ANPPR5576A vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, KURNOOL. (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : -None- For Revenue : Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr AR Date of Hearing : 10.03.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 10.03.2025 ORDER PER MANJUNATHA G, A.M. : This appeal has been filed by the Assessee against the Order dated 02.02.2024 of the learned CIT(A)-National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short “NFAC”], Delhi, relating to the assessment year 2017-2018. 2. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is an individual and had not filed his return of income for the impugned assessment year 2017-2018. As per the 2 ITA.No.1191/Hyd./2024 information made available with the Department, the assessee has made cash deposits in current account at Rs.1,26,88,500/-, cash withdrawals from current account of Rs.10,000/- and received other interest of Rs.7,500/-. In absence of return of income, the Assessing Officer has reason to believe that the income chargeable to tax had escaped assessment and, therefore, the case of the assessee has been reopened u/sec.147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [in short “the Act”] and notice u/sec.148 of the Act was issued on 26.03.2021 through ITBA portal after getting approval from the Competent Authority. The Assessing Officer also issued statutory notices u/sec.142(1) dated 17.06.2021, 22.11.2021 and 06.12.2021. In absence of any explanation/reply filed by the assessee, the Assessing Officer determined the total income of the assessee at Rs.1,26,96,000/- [i.e., Rs.1,26,88,500/- cash deposit + other interest of Rs.7,500/-] u/sec.69A of the Act vide order dated 11.03.2022 passed u/sec.147 r.w.s.144 r.w.s.144B of the Act. 3 ITA.No.1191/Hyd./2024 3. On being aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the learned CIT(A). During the course of appellate proceedings, the learned CIT(A) has issued notices dated 16.08.2023, 06.09.2023, 13.09.2023, 19.10.2023, 20.10.2023 and 01.01.2024 calling the assessee to substantiate his case. In absence of any reply from the side of the assessee to substantiate his case, the learned CIT(A) has sustained the additions made by the Assessing Officer. 4. Aggrieved by the order of the learned CIT(A), the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the Tribunal. 5. During the course of hearing, none appeared on behalf of the assessee nor any application seeking for adjournment has been filed. We, therefore, proceed to decide the appeal on merits, after hearing the Learned DR. We find at the very outset, that there is a delay of 285 days in filing the instant appeal by the assessee before the Tribunal and considered relevant reasons given by the assessee in the petition filed for condonation of delay. We find that the assessee has stated at that his accountant who 4 ITA.No.1191/Hyd./2024 is responsible for looking after the tax matters, did not look at the orders of the Income Tax Portal and informed the Management to take appropriate steps in filing the appeal. However, on going through the petition filed by the assessee for condonation of the delay, the assessee has simply shifted the blame on a third person without referring even his name and from the above, it is undisputedly clear that, the assessee does not have any reasons to explain the delay in filling the appeal, except to shift in the blame on a third person because he cannot be examined. Therefore, in our considered view, the reasons given by the assessee does not give any ‘reasonable cause’ so as to condone the delay of 285 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. This view is fortified by the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s. Kolte Patil Developer Pvt. Ltd., vs. CIT 2017- TIOL-185-SC wherein it has been held that when there is no explanation given for delay in filing of the appeal, such delay in filing cannot be condoned. Similar view has been taken by Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Subodh Prakash vs. JCIT 2017-TIOL-2249-HC-P&H-IT wherein it 5 ITA.No.1191/Hyd./2024 has been held when the explanation submitted by the appellant does not satisfy the test of ‘sufficient cause’ as required u/sec.5 of Limitation Act, 1963, the delay cannot be condoned. We, thus, confirm the order of the learned CIT(A) and accordingly, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed in limine. 6. In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed in limine. Order pronounced in the open Court on 10.03.2025. Sd/- Sd/- [RAVISH SOOD] [MANJUNATHA G] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Hyderabad, Dated 10th March, 2025 VBP Copy to 1. Guddennagari Ramakrishna, Ramakrishna Traders, 18/218, New Bus-stand, KODUMUR – 518 464. KURNOOL 2. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, 46/128-2, Prakash Nagar, Kurnool – 518 001, State of Andhra Pradesh. 3. The Pr. CIT, Kurnool. 4. The DR ITAT “B” Bench, Hyderabad 5. Guard File //By Order// //True Copy// Sr. Private Secretary : ITAT : Hyderabad Benches, Hyderabad. "